No Direct Impact On Complainant: Delhi High Court Rejects Plea Seeking FIR Against Art Gallery Exhibiting Offensive MF Hussain Paintings Depicting Hindu Deities

The Delhi High Court has dismissed a Petition seeking registration of an FIR against the Delhi Art Gallery which exhibited allegedly offensive paintings made by famous painter Maqbool Fida Hussain, depicting Hindu Deities.

The Petition before the Court was filed by Amita Sachdeva, challenging the Order of the Additional Sessions Judge which affirmed the Order of the Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC).

A Single Bench of Justice Amit Mahajan observed, “Undisputedly, any act that genuinely offends religious sentiments through visual or artistic depictions is a serious and sensitive matter. However, in the present case, the learned Trial Court is already seized of the matter, and will duly examine whether the ingredients of the alleged offence are satisfied. If, during the course of the trial, the petitioner is able to substantiate her allegations, the law will take its course, and appropriate action will be taken against the accused persons.”

The Bench said that the Petitioner’s contention that the display of the alleged offensive paintings hurts the religious sentiments of millions of people in ‘Sanatan’ community and therefore warrants mandatory registration of an FIR, is without merit.

Advocate Makarand D. Adkar represented the Petitioner while APP Raj Kumar and Senior Advocate Madhav Khurrana represented the Respondents.

Brief Facts

As per the Petitioner’s case, in December 2024, while visiting an exhibition titled “Hussain: The Timeless Modernist” at the Delhi Art Gallery along with her clerk, she allegedly came across paintings made by painter M.F. Hussain depicting Hindu Deities in a manner which was offensive, derogatory, and intended to insult religious sentiments and outrage religious feelings. She then lodged a complaint with the police against the Gallery and its Directors whereupon the SHO (Station House Officer) of the concerned Police Station allegedly informed her that a Police team had been dispatched to the spot.

It was further alleged that the Investigating Officer (IO) contacted the Petitioner and requested her to join the police team at the venue of the exhibition to identify the location where the offensive paintings had been displayed; however, upon reaching the premises, it was found that the said paintings had already been removed. The Petitioner made a representation to the DCP but no action was taken. Hence, she filed an Application under Section 175 (3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) before the Trial Court, seeking registration of FIR. The Trial Court, however, directed issuance of notice to the accused persons in terms of the first proviso to Section 223 of the BNSS so as to afford them an opportunity of being heard, while observing that recourse to Section 225 of the BNSS may be taken at a subsequent stage, if so warranted.

Reasoning

The High Court in view of the above facts, noted, “In the instant case, this court is of the opinion that no exceptional circumstances have been presented to warrant the exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction under Section 528 of the BNSS. There is no indication of any miscarriage of justice or legal irregularity in the proceedings undertaken by the two lower courts, and the petitioner has not pointed out any such deficiencies.”

The Court emphasised that an offence relating to the outraging of religious feelings, such as the one alleged in this case, must be found on a direct impact on the Complainant himself.

“The law requires that the person alleging such an offence must themselves have experienced the injury or hurt caused by the material in question. A complaint under the alleged offence cannot be treated as being in a representative capacity on behalf of an entire community or class”, it remarked.

The Court, therefore, concluded that only those individuals who personally came across the alleged offensive material and whose religious sentiments were actually offended, are entitled to seek recourse under the said provision.

Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the Petition.

Cause Title- Amita Sachdeva v. State of NCT of Delhi & Ors. (Case Number: CRL.M.C. 6388/2025)

Appearance:

Petitioner: Advocates Makarand D. Adkar, Vikram Kumar, Yadavendra Saxena, Mayank Dwivedi, and Abhinav Kumar.

Respondents: APP Raj Kumar, Senior Advocate Madhav Khurrana, Advocates John, Piyush Swami, Teeksh, and Ibrahim.

Click here to read/download the Order